<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2006 (1) TMI 380 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117374</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the Commissioner&#039;s order that confirmed the disputed Modvat credit amount and imposed a penalty. It held that the revenue could not compel the reversal of Modvat credit to meet notification conditions, as non-reversal would result in the denial of benefits. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, granting the appellant consequential relief.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 10 Jan 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 27 Mar 2024 10:12:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=154371" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (1) TMI 380 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117374</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the Commissioner&#039;s order that confirmed the disputed Modvat credit amount and imposed a penalty. It held that the revenue could not compel the reversal of Modvat credit to meet notification conditions, as non-reversal would result in the denial of benefits. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, granting the appellant consequential relief.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 10 Jan 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117374</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>